Threesome Proposal Leads To Suspension

An agreed two-year suspension with terms has been accepted by the Virginia State Bar Disciplinary Board .

The stipulated misconduct involved two female clients; one incarcerated on a probation violation

T.H. told the VSB investigator that she became familiar with Respondent on the “Seeking Arrangements” website prior to Respondent representing T.H. Respondent denies that the two became familiar with each other on the “Seeking Arrangements” website, and asserts that they met on a personal dating website.

 After meeting through the social media platform, Respondent and T.H. only spoke on the phone prior to T.H.’s arrest. When T.H. was arrested, she called Respondent for help.

…On August 27, 2019, T.H. approached officers at the jail and told them that Respondent was representing her pro bono, but with the understanding that T.H. would engage in a sexual relationship with Respondent once she was out of jail.

T.H. also told the officers that she and Respondent discussed conversations of a sexual nature by video conference on the jail’s video visitation system. The video visitation system is not a protected mode of communicating privileged and/or confidential information with an attorney as the video tablet is in open view in a room housing several inmates and the video tablet used for the video visitation can be seen and heard by the inmates housed in the room.

Client B.I. was facing DUI, resisting arrest and open container charges

After the interviews with T.H., officers viewed the visitation system videos and saw “a pattern of [Respondent] cultivating a three-person romantic relationship between himself, [T.H.], and [B.I.]” The videos extended from the end of June 2019 through the end of August 2019.

B.I. was not incarcerated at the time and was present in many of the videos with Respondent in his residence. Respondent spoke of T.H. “hanging out with him and his girl”. Many of the visitation system videos included sexual innuendo and, on some occasions, there were direct references made to sexual activity having occurred between Respondent and B.I. and the hope of future sexual activity involving Respondent and both T.H. and B.I.

One officer reviewing the visitation system videos noted that 1) Respondent showed T.H. a photo of B.I.’s breasts on his phone; 2) Respondent fondled B.I.’s breast over her night shirt on one occasion and over her bathing suit on another occasion; 3) Respondent disclosed a dream in which he was with both women in bed; 4) Respondent told T.H. her “spankings” were stacking up; 5) Respondent told T.H. she was “beautiful,” “hot,” and “a hot little girl”; 6) Respondent called T.H. “baby,” “honey,” “jail kitty,” and “wet kitty”; 7) Respondent said to T.H., “you know who you belong to,” and 8) Respondent exchanged “I love you” with T.H. on video numerous times.

Another officer reviewing the visitation system videos noted that 1) Respondent told T.H. “you’re looking good and putting a few ideas in my head” and “you need to get more experienced”; 2) Respondent told T.H. he looked forward to her “being a problem child” and he was attracted to her; 3) Respondent told T.H., “you don’t have to be an extra with us, just get in the middle” and “I can’t wait to have my hands full of you”; 4) Respondent told T.H. he will show her “things that come up that I can’t control” and “get ready for the love train”; and 5) Respondent told T.H. “we are having a race with my finger and her toy” and “we are holding a place for you.”

T.H. secured new appointed counsel and denied the sex-for-fees arrangement to the Bar.

During the VSB investigation, T.H. denied that she told the officers that Respondent agreed to represent her pro bono in exchange for a sexual relationship with him. T.H. told the VSB investigator that she would have sex with Respondent on her own terms and not in exchange for his legal services

Respondent also used his escrow account for personal purposes

Respondent paid his rent, dining, groceries, ABC purchases, and drugstore purchases directly from his trust account.

The Virginian-Pilot reported on the charges. (Mike Frisch)